On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 11:56:53AM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> Thanks for fielding this one. Does put_unaligned_le32 optimize away on
> platforms with efficient access? It would be great if we didn't need
> the #ifdef.
(quicktest: assembly output is same for put_unaligned_le32 and direct
assignment on my x86_64)
I was originally following examples in
Documentation/unaligned-memory-access.txt. From other code it seems to me that
the define CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS is intended for larger
portions of code. Macros/wrappers for {put,get}_unaligned* are chosen via
arch/<arch>/include/asm/unaligned.h accordingly, therefore it's safe to use
put_unaligned_le32 without the ifdef.
dave
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>
#include <linux/crc32c.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/migrate.h>
+#include <asm/unaligned.h>
#include "compat.h"
#include "ctree.h"
#include "disk-io.h"
void btrfs_csum_final(u32 crc, char *result)
{
- *(__le32 *)result = ~cpu_to_le32(crc);
+ put_unaligned_le32(~crc, result);
}
/*